Detroit Needs an Eye Catcher

[313WX]

I always said Detroit's skyline [[especially in comparison to its sister cities [[NYC, Chicago, Philadelphia) of the 20th century) really slows how the city just stopped growing.

With the exception of One Detroit Center and the RenCen, Detroit hasn't really gotten any other skyscrapers that made a huge impact on its skyline since the 1930s [[of course, besides a couple other 25-30-story skyscrapers in the 1960s and 1970s, which you can only view up close).

The fact that we lost the massive Hudson's building was a huge blow too. Nothing will ever replace it quite frankly.

[DetroitPlanner]

Both Philly and Los Angeles show the same dry spell. Philly's boom ended before ours with virtually nothing being built after the landmark PSFS building in the 1930's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loews_Philadelphia_Hotel

Another Philly boom started after the Detroit boom that gave us buildings such as the Pontch, City Hall, and MichCon.

[313WX]

Both Philly and Los Angeles show the same dry spell. Philly's boom ended before ours with virtually nothing being built after the landmark PSFS building in the 1930's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loews_Philadelphia_Hotel

Another Philly boom started after the Detroit boom that gave us buildings such as the Pontch, City Hall, and MichCon.

Yeah, but compare Philadelphia's skyline from 1980 to now and there is a massive difference in its skyline.

Detroit, from 1980 to now, not so much [[with the exception of, unless you count the Casinos, One Detroit Center).

[DetroitPlanner]

Detroit, from 1980 to now, not so much [[with the exception of, unless you count the Casinos, One Detroit Center).

Lets see:
150 Jefferson
Millender
Habrortown
Trolley Plaza
UAW
Riverfront Towers
Compuware
Joe Louis Arena

None of these count?

Detroit don't need big buildings, it needs quality buildings. Skyscrapers are for suckers. They will put a huge burden on infrastructure.

[313WX]

Lets see:
150 Jefferson
Millender
Habrortown
Trolley Plaza
UAW
Riverfront Towers
Compuware
Joe Louis Arena

None of these count?

Detroit don't need big buildings, it needs quality buildings. Skyscrapers are for suckers. They will put a huge burden on infrastructure.

All of those are around 30 stories or lower, which from a reasonable distance, aren't "eye-catching." The only "eye-catching" skyscrapers Detroit has seen since the Great Depression are One Detroit Center and the Renaissance Center.

That said, Detroit has bigger problems then worrying about eye-catching skyscrapers. It needs to focus on fixing the reasons it doesn't have eye-catching skyscrapers.

[MidTownMs]

All of those are around 30 stories or lower, which from a reasonable distance, aren't "eye-catching." The only "eye-catching" skyscrapers Detroit has seen since the Great Depression are One Detroit Center and the Renaissance Center.

That said, Detroit has bigger problems then worrying about eye-catching skyscrapers. It needs to focus on fixing the reasons it doesn't have eye-catching skyscrapers.

What Detroit really needs to focus on is trying to give it's resident a reason to stay in Detroit. When I lived in Detroit I didn't give much thought about skyscrapers even though I worked downtown in one for many years. What I cared about was feeling safe and hoping that the people we elected to make decisions would make those decisions in the best interest of the citizens of Detroit. Instead I felt unsafe and the decision makers were opportunists who cared only what was in their best interest.

[Honky Tonk]

What Detroit really needs to focus on is trying to give it's resident a reason to stay in Detroit. When I lived in Detroit I didn't give much thought about skyscrapers even though I worked downtown for many years. What I cared about was feeling safe and hoping that the people we elected to make decisions would make those decisions in the best interest of the citizens of Detroit. Instead I felt unsafe and the decision makers were opportunists who cared only what was in their best interest.

Thank You. If the basics are taken care of, the skyscrapers will follow. We've already tried grandiose, and it's not working.

[DetroitPlanner]

What Detroit really needs to focus on is trying to give it's resident a reason to stay in Detroit. When I lived in Detroit I didn't give much thought about skyscrapers even though I worked downtown in one for many years. What I cared about was feeling safe and hoping that the people we elected to make decisions would make those decisions in the best interest of the citizens of Detroit. Instead I felt unsafe and the decision makers were opportunists who cared only what was in their best interest.

Exactly. If we can't keep people feeling safe, then it don't matter how big the building are because there will be no incentive to do business.

[Jason]

An "eye catching" building that manages to seep into the general public's conscious is very hard to do and requires a perfect storm to happen. I don't think it's something worth chasing.

But you can get the same PR, tourism, and reputation benefits by appealing to the design world rather than the general public. It's a smaller group of people but they'll also remember you better and they're more likely to make travel plans, or talk about a city in a positive or negative light, based on the architecture of a city.


In Detroit, Lafayette Park is an easy example. LP has made millions of positive impressions of the city throughout the world, through various books, blogs, exhibitions, word of mouth, etc. and Elmwood Park hasn't. And unlike Pure Michigan ads, which target a generic audience with generic positives, this is specific positives about people specifically interested, and unlike the Pure Michigan ads which are ephemeral, these are physical buildings which will keep "giving" for decades. Look at the difference in home values between Lafayette Park and Elmwood Park. But LP didn't cost any more money. All of this value wasn't added by increasing the budget, it was added by simply hiring a good architect.

So aside from making those of us who care about these things happier, good architecture adds a lot of value and improves the city's overall reputation, without costing any extra money.

[Strong]

An "eye catching" building that manages to seep into the general public's conscious is very hard to do and requires a perfect storm to happen. I don't think it's something worth chasing.

But you can get the same PR, tourism, and reputation benefits by appealing to the design world rather than the general public. It's a smaller group of people but they'll also remember you better and they're more likely to make travel plans, or talk about a city in a positive or negative light, based on the architecture of a city.


In Detroit, Lafayette Park is an easy example. LP has made millions of positive impressions of the city throughout the world, through various books, blogs, exhibitions, word of mouth, etc. and Elmwood Park hasn't. And unlike Pure Michigan ads, which target a generic audience with generic positives, this is specific positives about people specifically interested, and unlike the Pure Michigan ads which are ephemeral, these are physical buildings which will keep "giving" for decades. Look at the difference in home values between Lafayette Park and Elmwood Park. But LP didn't cost any more money. All of this value wasn't added by increasing the budget, it was added by simply hiring a good architect.

So aside from making those of us who care about these things happier, good architecture adds a lot of value and improves the city's overall reputation, without costing any extra money.

I really like this and its drives home my point of posting this thread. I realize like many of you do that Detroit has its share of problems. If that said I don't mind talking about the problems but if we only concentrate on them and not if for one moment look at the bright side then we won't foresee The Great Detroit?

[DetroitPlanner]

We need a big @$$ ferris wheel!

[gthomas]

I really like this and its drives home my point of posting this thread. I realize like many of you do that Detroit has its share of problems. If that said I don't mind talking about the problems but if we only concentrate on them and not if for one moment look at the bright side then we won't foresee The Great Detroit?

So true, ....We are speaking of Downtown here, not 6mile and John R. So you think with over 95% occupancy rates in Downtown, even Midtown...people don't feel safe? It's well over due for new development in these areas, only crime happening around here really is petty stuff like ...car thief etc. Downtown and Midtown has the lowest crime rate, even less than some of the suburbs communities. I don't feel safe in some parts of the suburbs either, should I base my opinion on not going out there to shop, live..etc? Crime doesn't have a name or face..it can happen any and everywhere.

I live here in Midtown and I feel perfectly safe walking around anytime of the day or night. You guys myth is just that..MYTH, how can you say theirs no incentives to do business here? You have no clue, you are looking from the outside, in. Rather you believe it or not, we're progressing and what you see is real..the ugly and beauty side of it. Be part of the solution, not the confusion..what do you have to bring to the table to stop this lack of "feeling safe"? Be "part" of society, not "apart" from it...I understand Detroit is not for everybody...we have proven everybody wrong before, it's our time. We all know the problems, let's just find a solution...and telling us what we already know isn't making things progress any further, its actually whats been holding us back....like I said, "Offer Solution". Until then....sshhhh

[gthomas]

Lets see:
150 Jefferson
Millender
Habrortown
Trolley Plaza
UAW
Riverfront Towers
Compuware
Joe Louis Arena

None of these count?

Detroit don't need big buildings, it needs quality buildings. Skyscrapers are for suckers. They will put a huge burden on infrastructure.

These buildings has no "visually" eye-catching design. I don't come downtown to look at these buildings...boring. Please look google the word "eye-catching" buildings..

[gthomas]

An "eye catching" building that manages to seep into the general public's conscious is very hard to do and requires a perfect storm to happen. I don't think it's something worth chasing.

But you can get the same PR, tourism, and reputation benefits by appealing to the design world rather than the general public. It's a smaller group of people but they'll also remember you better and they're more likely to make travel plans, or talk about a city in a positive or negative light, based on the architecture of a city.


In Detroit, Lafayette Park is an easy example. LP has made millions of positive impressions of the city throughout the world, through various books, blogs, exhibitions, word of mouth, etc. and Elmwood Park hasn't. And unlike Pure Michigan ads, which target a generic audience with generic positives, this is specific positives about people specifically interested, and unlike the Pure Michigan ads which are ephemeral, these are physical buildings which will keep "giving" for decades. Look at the difference in home values between Lafayette Park and Elmwood Park. But LP didn't cost any more money. All of this value wasn't added by increasing the budget, it was added by simply hiring a good architect.

So aside from making those of us who care about these things happier, good architecture adds a lot of value and improves the city's overall reputation, without costing any extra money.

That's the whole point here, it's a proven fact..I agree.

[Spartan]

These buildings has no "visually" eye-catching design. I don't come downtown to look at these buildings...boring. Please look google the word "eye-catching" buildings..

I'd say Compuware is the only one on that list. Really there's only a few buildings that are attractions in Detroit:
Ren Cen
Compuware
Guardian
Fisher
[Train Station]
maybe Penobscot, One Detroit, Book

[Drexciya68]

I use to work at the CNA Building in Downtown Chicago. It stands out simple for it's color. I think it gives the skyline some flavor. -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNA_Center

[southen]

These buildings has no "visually" eye-catching design. I don't come downtown to look at these buildings...boring. Please look google the word "eye-catching" buildings..

are you just looking for some crazy frank gehry building that the average person will drool over?

[gthomas]

are you just looking for some crazy frank gehry building that the average person will drool over?

I'm looking for this.




The new COBO hall is a great example of a "eye-catching" building.

[Jason]

I think those kinds of skyscrapers are neither here nor there. Hundreds of them are being built around the world and the general public doesn't know about them. At the same time designers don't really like them/aren't interested in them, so as far as PR goes those buildings don't accomplish much.

[gthomas]

I think those kinds of skyscrapers are neither here nor there. Hundreds of them are being built around the world and the general public doesn't know about them. At the same time designers don't really like them/aren't interested in them, so as far as PR goes those buildings don't accomplish much.

What type of building will fit what u talking about?

[gthomas]

[gthomas]

Someone mention awhile back, wondering how would our city been if Downtown itself was on Belle Isle, with a wider iconic bridge. The riverfront and Jefferson st. would of been stocked with Highrise housing and would of been much more appealing for people to live closer to the water beside heading further away pass 8mile.

[gthomas]

Just imagine GM Renaissance Center towering over just east of the Scott Fountain with our other skyscrapers filling in behind it, surrounding the dense central forest park area. Keeping the current asset on the Island like the beach, aquarium, conservatory, zoo etc... How wonderful would that be..

[gthomas]

Amazing!!!!

[wolverine]

I'd prefer a ton of smaller infill over signature buildings. I think the world already identifies Detroit with the RenCen and I think that's a reasonable icon.

Many cities face the tragedy of losing so many buildings to progress, but Detroit tore down so many for absolutely nothing. I only hope new cutting edge buildings can make up for that loss, but they need not be towers.